In the prior art clinical scenario, a patient diagnosis/therapy is dependent on resources available in the clinical facility. However, given the growing complexity and costs of imaging devices such as Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), Computed Tomography (CT), Nuclear Medicine (NM), and Ultrasound (US), a lot of experience and clinical expertise are needed to make optimum use of the potential of these imaging devices, e.g. how a patient suffering from Acute Cerebral Insult has to be treated within a clinical facility, what is the sequence of examination at CT, US, and Magnetic Resonance (MR) devices, which examination protocols are to be used, which post processing application/tools are to be used etc.
Due to research and/or business focus of the clinical facility in many cases certain special sequences, protocols, post processing applications, etc. are rarely used, and the cost of having them all is very high. Also, it is difficult to maintain updates of the developments taking place (e.g. what are best protocols, sequences for treating a patient with prostate cancer).
MR, for example, being a non-invasive modality, offers a variety of image contrasts through numerous techniques. During the last decades, rapid technological advancements in the area of new applications, sequences, hardware, post-processing, therapies based on results, etc. pose challenges to the MR scientific community (Radiologists and MR Manufacturers) to maintain updated knowledge about best possible clinical applications. However, such clinical expert knowledge would be useful to streamline workflow and optimize the use of MR innovative applications.
Medical care providers issue increasingly clear process documents for their medical and diagnostic capacities. The examination indication is linked, conditional upon the patient and the disease, with very specific questions that are to be answered by the examination.
Complex examination methods (modalities) allow the examiner an adaptation of the examination flow path (for example measurement protocol in Magnetic Resonance Tomography (MRT)) to the question to be answered. The complexity can pertain both to the “measurement” itself and to possibly necessary post-processing and document steps. Complex examination methods are, for example, MRT, CT, and laboratory diagnostics.
The association of a medical question with a commensurate examination flow path can be difficult and at the same time require deep understanding of the examination methods and of the diseases to be examined. However, the examination is often conducted by personnel who do not possess the qualification to adapt the examination flow path to the question.
The same problem also arises one level higher, where it is imperative to select the diagnostic procedures and modalities commensurate with the medical question.
In the prior art, standardized examination protocols are pre-defined at the examination apparatus. The examiner makes a selection under the standard protocols corresponding to the question. The standard protocols are, if applicable, still adapted by expensive, highly-qualified personnel.
However, in many cases this procedure leads to unsatisfactory results. For example, the medical questions are many-sided and can often not be directly associated with one standard protocol. The user then selects one or more standard protocols that, however, in summation incorporate the answer to the question, but however, often also exceed it. The examination is thus more extensive (more expensive) than is necessary.
Both the number of the medical questions that are addressed at one modality and the number of the possible examination flow paths (for example in MRT: questions from all organ regions and very many diseases—typically >1000 standard protocols) can be very large. In these cases, medical expertise is already necessary in order to associate a standardized examination flow path with a medical question.
Moreover, combinations of questions are always provided for which an optimal standard protocol cannot be defined in advance.
The selection of the commensurate procedure and modality is often regulated internal to a department at the higher levels.
The rules are in part fixed in writing, however are also in part only present as an oral consensus between the participating doctors.